Supreme Court Orders District Courts to Limit Injunctions Against Birthright Citizenship Executive Order to Parties

In a 6 to 3 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to partially stay three district court nationwide injunctions that barred implementation of President Trump’s January 20 birthright citizenship Executive Order (EO), meaning the injunctions will only apply to the plaintiff individuals, organizations and U.S. states while the lower court cases continue on the issue of the constitutionality of the EO. The Court did not decide whether the executive order is constitutional, as that question has not yet been reached by the lower courts and was not raised in the Supreme Court appeals. The government will be permitted to implement the EO with respect to non-parties in the lawsuit in 30 days. The case is Trump v. CASA Inc., et al.

The Court also ruled on the legality of nationwide – or “universal” in the Court’s terminology – injunctions generally, holding that they likely exceed the authority that Congress has granted to the federal courts. The ruling seemed to indicate that class action lawsuits may be the more appropriate avenue for widespread relief from government action. At least one class action lawsuit challenging the birthright citizenship EO has already been filed in federal court and more are anticipated.

As the district courts adjust their injunctions to align with the Supreme Court ruling, the U.S. government will be permitted to prepare for the EO to take effect in 30 days for non-litigants. It is expected that the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security will issue guidance on the new rules and processes for U.S. passports and U.S. immigration status for affected children.

Upon taking office on January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) that sought to limit birthright citizenship for certain groups of children born in the United States after February 19, 2025. For over a century, the U.S. government and the courts have interpreted Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (the “Citizenship Clause”) to mean that any individual born in the United States is a U.S. citizen at birth, regardless of their parents’ immigration status (with a few very narrow exceptions). President Trump’s birthright citizenship EO significantly departs from this interpretation by stating that children born in the United States after February 19 who do not have a U.S. citizen or U.S. lawful permanent resident biological parent at the time of their birth, will not be U.S. citizens.

The EO seeks to exclude from birthright citizenship children born to parents in nonimmigrant status, such as B-1/B-2 (including Visa Waiver), F-1, J-1, H-1B, L-1, E, O-1, P, TN, and any nonimmigrant dependent status, if the other parent is not a U.S. lawful permanent resident or U.S. citizen. There are no exceptions in the EO for foreign national parents who hold temporary nonimmigrant status and are also in the process of applying for a green card – their children would not be considered U.S. citizens upon birth in the United States under the terms of the EO.

In January 2025, several lawsuits were filed in federal district courts challenging the legality of the birthright citizenship EO and its interpretation of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause. In at least three of the lawsuits, the district courts ordered nationwide injunctions barring the government from implementing the EO changes to birthright citizenship. The Trump administration submitted appeals of these orders to the Court of Appeal in each jurisdiction, asking the courts to limit the lower court injunctions to the Plaintiff U.S. states, individuals, and groups involved in the lawsuits, thereby permitting the government to partially implement the EO while litigation challenging its legality continues. The three Courts of Appeal denied these requests. The Trump Administration sought review by the Supreme Court on the same issue of the scope of the district court injunctions and the Court agreed, holding oral arguments on the issue on May 15, 2025.

The ongoing district court cases at issue in the Supreme Court decision are:

• Casa Inc. et al v. Trump et al., Case No. 8:25-cv-00201 (D. Md., filed Jan 21, 2025).
• State of Washington et. al. v. Trump et. al., Case No. 2:25-cv-00127 (W.D. Wash., filed Jan 21, 2025)
• State of New Jersey et. al v. Trump et. al., Case No. 25-cv-10139 (D. Mass., filed Jan 21, 2025)

Thus far, none of the lawsuits or appeals have reached the main issue in the birthright citizenship EO legal challenges, which is whether the EO violates the Citizenship Clause in the 14th Amendment. The underlying lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the EO will continue.

The district courts are ordered to adjust their injunctions to apply only to Plaintiff individuals, organizations and U.S. states in the above lawsuits. The U.S. states challenging the EO are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. The city of San Francisco and the District of Columbia are also parties to the suit.

Further litigation is expected, as are announcements and guidance from U.S. government agencies that issue citizenship documents.